> I was working from the assumption that the initializers of non-mut statics > are checked to ensure they do not contain values of non-Freeze types, nor > destructors. Does the new plan also involve lifting this restriction? (From > the below it seems like it does.)
Yes, by disallowing taking the address of non-Freeze non-mut (confusing, right?) statics, we can allow non-Freeze values in non-mut statics. > While I understand the motivation here, couldn't/shouldn't this use case be > served by an `init_atomic_uint!()` macro? Sadly not quite, the fields of an `AtomicUint` should be private, and macros don't bypass privacy (they're just AST expansion) _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
